“Value Added” is wrong, not funny
The UFT took a good ad with the wrong graphic yesterday. We were right to push back, that was necessary. But not with this:
1. It is not NYC’s Value Added formula. It is a generic Value Added formula. Not sure if I’m right? The UFT calls it a “sample”.
2. This formula, with even more terms and symbols and subscripts and Greek letters, this formula on steroids – is what the UFT and NYSUT are helping New York State develop.
3. I can read this. I can teach you to, if you’d like. It’s hard, but not that hard. But it’s probably not worth it.
4. We are teachers, dammit. We don’t make fun of learning or knowledge. Or at least most of us don’t.
5. This great big formula is designed to see what difference each teacher makes “on the test.” That is wrong. Completely wrong. There is much more to teaching than “the test.”
6. Even if we cared more about tests, not THESE tests. I’m not going to start.
7. The text of the ad was good! But the graphic was awful.
8. I wish the UFT really thought “That’s no way to evaluate a teacher!” Our work at the State level speaks otherwise.
9. I have no illusion that what comes out of Albany will be any better. Perhaps State Ed will describe their formula in words so that no one can make posters out of the scary equation. That way we can focus on what’s wrong with the entire concept, and stop making fun of math (though honestly, that number-free formula is not from a math course. Stats for sociology or psychology majors maybe?)